Throughout nearly a full NASCAR season featuring a lawsuit between Joe Gibbs Racing vs. its former competition director, Chris Gabehart, and his new employer, Spire Motorsports, now there are specific examples of what this is specifically about.
Joe Gibbs Racing filed the lawsuit in February after Spire confirmed that it had hired Gabehart to serve as Chief Motorsports Officer. The claims included a breach of contract and a ‘brazen scheme’ to steal proprietary information and take it to Spire.
Since then, Judge Susan C. Rodriguez presiding over the trial has stated definitively that Gabehart misappropriated competition and commercial data by continuing to access and store JGR information on personal drives even after parting ways in a meeting with Coach Joe Gibbs. Additionally, Gabehart took photographs on his cell phone of additional JGR information on his personal devices, accessing them even before meetings with Spire co-owner Jeff Dickerson.
However, Gabehart has maintained that he has not used that information this season, and that such data was all given back to JGR after the latter conducted a forensic analysis of those personal devices over the winter prior to litigation.
The matter is still ongoing within the court and a jury trial is scheduled to begin on February 1.
Currently, in the closing moments of the fact discovery process, Joe Gibbs Racing and Spire Motorsports are arguing over what setup sheets and documents the plaintiffs should have access to as part of discovery.
It’s the court’s preference to not make orders on such matters but it may have to should the parties ultimately not agree. Joe Gibbs Racing has motioned the court to compel Spire to produce several documents and in a response on Wednesday, Spire explained what this process has looked like and specific examples of what JGR wants in trying to prove damages from Gabehart this season.
“At the September 21 meet and confer, Spire proposed limiting the scope of Request No. 10 to documents sufficient to show the value of the at-issue trade secrets. JGR disagreed with Spire’s view of the at-issue trade secrets and believes that its forthcoming production of unspecified documents in connection with its expert report(s) is sufficient. Yet Spire seeks a broader set of damages-related documents showing JGR’s investment in the development of the at-issue trade secrets, including those not relied upon by JGR’s expert(s).”
Spire, in a footnote, says JGR is seeking ‘1) a spreadsheet created by Gabehart to track race outcomes, 2) JGR’s processes for sealing racecar airboxes and related ductwork; 3) JGR processes for vacuum testing racecar underbodies; 4) certain transaxle lubrication specifications/procedures; and 5) race car setups from the 2025 Cup Series season.’
Joe Gibbs Racing is also currently motioning the court to hold Gabehart and Spire in contempt of a restraining order to not serve in a capacity similar to his JGR competition director role while at Spire – something it argues has continued to happen since the court made its preliminary injunction decisions.
Joe Gibbs Racing also claims other issues remain unresolved as of Wednesday:
- JGR’s request for Competition Meeting Materials from: (1) Cup Series competition
meetings that Gabehart attended; (2) meetings regarding the Daytona, Atlanta, and
COTA races; (3) meetings regarding Cup Series races for which Gabehart attended at
least one competition meeting; and (4) meetings at which Spire personnel discussed
Spire’s procedures identified by JGR in its Second MTC. See Dkt. 171-1 at 5–11; Dkt.
212, Spire Resp., at 2–7; Dkt. 237, JGR Reply ISO Second Mot. to Compel, at 2–9 - JGR’s request for the Additional Technical Documents.
Regarding ‘documents related to JGR’s alleged damages, including the economic value of the alleged misappropriated trade secrets,’ Spire says there has not been a resolution for the following reason:
“Pending in its entirety. … At the September 21 meet and confer, Spire proposed limiting the scope of Request No. 10 to documents sufficient to show the value of the at-issue trade secrets. JGR disagreed with Spire’s view of the at-issue trade secrets and believes that its forthcoming production of unspecified documents in connection with its expert report(s) is sufficient. Yet Spire seeks a broader set of damages-related documents showing JGR’s investment in the development of the at-issue trade secrets, including those not relied upon by JGR’s expert(s).”
There’s a lot of legalese here, but just understand that both parties disagree on what items should be produced.
Joe Gibbs Racing would probably argue that their trade secreted violations are much more exapansive than what Spire says they are in its filings and arguments.
Hendrick Motorsports looped in
Keep in mind, that for all the talk of what information from Joe Gibbs Racing Spire may or may not be using this season, Dickerson has claimed in court and publicly, that they have no need for JGR information because Hendrick Motorsports provides technical support to Spire.
Spire pays Hendrick Motorsports for support, car build and set-up assistance.
To that end, Hendrick has notified the court that it will be placing attorneys in attendance to ‘protect its interests’ in connection to the trial. In a filing, HMS says those attorneys will attend an October 1 hearing and ‘intends to discuss Hendrick Motorsports concerns’ at that moment.
Specifically, HMS has concerns about Joe Gibbs Racing seeking the production of proprietary information it has created and supplied to Spire as part of their technical alliance.
The court has asked Hendrick Motorsports to file those objections by this Friday. Representing Hendrick will be attorney C. Bailey King Jr. of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP.
We want your opinion! What would you like to see on Motorsport.com? – The Motorsport.com Team
